This has become an unproductive brawl . . . maybe it would be useful to just step back and take a deep breath? IMO the high temperature is muddying the water. And a lot of the discussion is down in the weeds. If systemd (or a close counterpart with essentially the same architecture) is in the process of being adopted as the new defacto boot system for the main Linux distributions such as Fedora, Mandriva, Ubuntu, etc. then it isn't a matter of if, it's a matter of when and how. Presumably even Debian, on purpose a later adopter, will eventually adopt systemd. So openSUSE will ultimately need to adopt systemd, or fall behind in a critical sub-system. If systemd is not emerging as a new defacto standard and the main distros are going to splinter into entirely different boot sub-systems, then the pros and cons of not only systemd but the implications of such a split, is what should be debated. But the debate should be based upon the merits of the new sub- system, the implications of going a different direction or staying with the old, etc. (And there may be implications beyond the obvious.) While the transition is absolutely critical, how that gets managed is a different discussion than whether there should be a transition at all. Presuming that systemd will ultimately be adopted, the next reality to accept is the limitation of the affected and available developement resources. If "the lab" (whomever that is for openSUSE) says that it cannot effectively support 2 boot sub-systems, then again it becomes a question of how to most effectively manage the transition to the new. Administrators can and should contribute to this process. The lab should take very seriously that making the transition as painless as possible is every bit as important as doing the new sub-system implementation itself. Most of the objections posted have been "when" and "how" objections, and those are very valid concerns. Judging from the problems with systemd in 12.1 upgrades, it does appear that the first phase rollout was not well managed. The lab cannot expect administrators let alone users to know what they don't know, and responding to concerns and frustrations with "read the man page" only adds fuel to the fire. Similarly, the lab owes the community a well- developed and complete transition plan that proactively addresses concerns. There needs to be ample time for adminstrators to prepare, documentation needs to have been completed, comprehensive transition testing needs to be done. And it needs to be understood that given the importance of a well-managed transition, either more elapsed time may be required and/or other tasks may have to slip. In short, my recommendation is that this issue be approached from a management perspective. The first question to decide is a binary one, systemd or no systemd - and without blurring that with issues of how to go about it or water that's under the bridge. If the answer is yes, then the focus should turn to the most effective way of getting there. If the answer is no, then the community lives with the implications of that decision. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org